Laserfiche WebLink
' ~~appl icatlOn. However, in preparing our findings for the original application, <br />the Division did not include the areas south of the drainage divide between <br />the North Fork and the Dry Fork within the anticipated mining. Therefore, we <br />-L~4.,.J LL L. ..J l: :4...a ...4-~~.4:.. 1 l.J F -fed <br />through use of subsidence monitoring data before such extraction was finally <br />approved. <br />For purposes of preparing a detailed CHIS including the areas south of the <br />divide, we will need to more explicitly define the plan for limited extraction <br />.,,+ 4F.~ e ;+~; ti,^~ ;4 11 ~.. applied ~~ will be neEes~ary to def:r.~ <br />a discrete boundary^for the buffer zones. Buffer zones will need to be <br />designated adjoining bath the Dry Fork of Minnesota Creek and Lick Creek. <br />O FF..^ ll - 4.. F... -+~~ F..... 4L..-. ,)l t .~.-..-.--:L L.-. <br />~ ~~1-~_ <br />adjoining the surface channel, not the centerline of the channel. Extraction <br />will need to be limited to some level significantly less than S6%, until the <br />.-..-.-.-. ~+.-..-. ~._~ ,1..- .-. Lam: J.,-...-_.L.-._- _..J L.J..~l--. .--.L-_: <br />ng-dot-a--w~-tk~ <br />which to verify the propriety of that extraction level. Finally, the width of <br />the appropriate buffer zone will need to be determined. <br />I believe 'the applicant, in amending its 1530 acre permit area increase permit <br />revision application. approved ].oat fall, provided a valid determination cif an <br />prevention of impacts south of that divide. This same rationale^could be <br />applied to the streams, resulting in buffer zone widths of 560 feet on each <br />;.3e .^F 4F-,c =11 nl .+e ++_ ^ntainin^ the Ehannel= Flawe1=^~-t._~~=-iuz-1~ <br />result in 'the delineationGof two substantial buffer cones. <br />_ n :+ o nl - ...a, ., :11 e^.+ +., ^ti~e^„e 4F.=+ +~^ e =t~.- <br />intendsmto amend the buffer cone plan, upon the collection of sufficient <br />subsidence monitoring and hydrologic monitoring data to demonstrate what exact <br />ie ^o ^F -^4.-1 ^.+.. .-+: -40 .-..i 4-.±+ .-. FFon :.+4h 11 FF'^~__ <br />to^protect^the critical areas.c However, for purposes of completing thec <br />required CHIS for all anticipated mining. we will be :able to justifiably <br />- .-.+. ..F F.~ .A~_~.-e~~_.~r+~l +F~a +., -.1 f•T' -1--~~ val. <br />keeping 1~uith the ^f finding precedents for ^ther permits within the North Fork' <br />area, such as Orchard '.alley' recent permit revision. <br />4Je could impose the buffer areas by stipulation, or the operator could elect <br />to amend their renewal application to commit Lo sin appr'opr'latB plan. ?~he <br />_+^ _ _ =o +-, of , - „~^.~.~o--_~-~-. ^^.r.ar+- w-~-1-1-,de-fermi-rw-wkl.l.._h----- - <br />approach we^will~need to pursue.m <br />attachments' <br />